Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Remarks
Regarding the applicants’ remarks about the independent claims, these remarks are now moot under new grounds of rejection as posted in the updated office action below.
Furthermore, the outstanding 112b rejection is hereby withdrawn based on the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1- 3, 7- 9, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (US 2021/0409850) in view of Wood (US 7088921) in further view of Link (WO 01/50640).
Regarding claim 1 and similar claim 7 and 13, Geng teaches a registration signal sending method, comprising: generating registration information and loading the registration information into an optical signal generated by a laser to generate a registration signal in the form of an optical signal carrying the registration information and sending the registration signal (Fig. 3, S304 and paragraph [0056], the ONU in the registration state sends uplink data within the bandwidth allocated by the OLT in step 1, and the content of the uplink data is identity information of the ONU, such as a media access address of the ONU or serial number information of the ONU).
Although Geng teaches sending the registration information using a laser, Geng doesn’t teach that the laser can comprise bias control.
Wood teaches an ONU 20 that comprises a bias control circuit 205 for its transmit laser 204 for upstream communications (Fig. 2, Col. 6, lines 5-8, The bias control circuit 205, coupled between the modulator 206 and the laser 204, keeps the laser below threshold… i.e. leading to spontaneous emission).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ONU taught by Geng and incorporate the teachings of biasing the laser below a threshold as taught by Wood in order to reduce ONU optical power during registration.
Although Geng in view of Wood teaches sending registration information from the ONU which comprises a laser that can be bias controlled to below threshold level (leading to spontaneous emission), Geng in view of Wood doesn’t explicitly show that the bias control of the laser below the threshold can be used to transmit information.
Link teaches an optical transmitter in which subthreshold current is deliberately generated wherein the current is maintained below a laser threshold (leading to spontaneous emission) (Page 2, paragraph 3, lines 1-10) and that a modulation circuit receives digital data and the subthreshold current contributes to the resulting optical signal (Page 8, paragraph 2 and Page 9, paragraph 2).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ONU transmitter taught by Geng in view of Wood and incorporate the teachings of Link to produce a controlled low optical level for the data signal so that the optical low level remains sufficiently large for accurate detection and control (Link: Page 7, paragraph 1).
Regarding claim 2 and similar claim 8, 14, Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the spontaneous-emission optical signal is generated by setting a bias current of the laser to less than a threshold current, wherein the threshold current is a preset current value (Both Wood and Link teach such limitations).
Regarding claim 3 and similar claim 9, 15, Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: setting a modulation current of the laser to zero (Wood teaches a bias control circuit 205 in Fig. 2 that can control the bias of the laser 204 below a threshold. Since this is a variable controller, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to realize that since “below threshold” can comprise 0, the control circuit 205 can appropriately control the laser to such a requirement).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 10, 11, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (US 2021/0409850) in view of Wood (US 7088921) in further view of Link (WO 01/50640) in view of Bernard (US 2015/0326311).
Regarding claim 4 and similar claim 10, 16, Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the loading of the registration information into a spontaneous-emission optical signal generated by a laser comprises as taught by Geng in view of Wood and Link, controlling the laser based on the registration information by using a transmission enable port so that the registration information is loaded into the spontaneous-emission optical signal (Geng: Fig. 3, s304 shows the ONU being able to load and send the registration information using a transmission enable port that enables transmission of such information).
Although Geng teaches transmitting the registration information, Geng doesn’t teach the transmission occurs by controlling enabling and disabling of the laser based on input bits.
Bernard teaches controlling enabling and disabling of the laser based on bits (paragraphs [0042] and [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the transmission of the registration information comprising bytes/bits as taught by Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link and incorporate controlling by enabling and disabling the laser based on bits as taught by Bernard in order to properly transmit the registration information for further processing.
Regarding claim 5 and similar claim 11, 17, Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein Geng teaches the registration information comprises a first bit and a second bit in binary (Geng: paragraph 56 states what types of registration information are transmitted and these types comprise multiple bits).
Although Geng teaches transmitting the registration information comprising first and second bits, Geng doesn’t teach for the first bit, the laser is controlled to be enabled to use transmission enable; and for the second bit, the laser is controlled to be disabled from being able to use the transmission port.
Bernard teaches controlling enabling and disabling of the laser based on bits (paragraphs [0042] and [0043] teaches that the laser is turned on for bit 1 and tuned off for bit 0 i.e. turned on/off based on the transmitted bits which is how optical communication takes place).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the transmission of the registration information comprising bytes/bits as taught by Geng and incorporate controlling by enabling and disabling the laser based on bits as taught by Bernard in order to properly transmit the registration information for further processing.
Claim(s) 6, 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (US 2021/0409850) in view of Wood (US 7088921) in further view of Link (WO 01/50640) in view of Weeber (US 2019/0356389).
Regarding claim 6 and similar claim 12, 18, Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link teaches the method according to claim 1.
Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link doesn’t teach wherein power of the registration response signal is lower than power of a service signal.
Weeber teaches wherein power of the response signal is lower than power of a service signal (paragraph [0056], the processor 360, via the MAC 380, may cause the transceiver 350 to respond…by sending a response RR at a low power of the laser 355, the low power being lower than normal power for sending data packets).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the output power of the registration response signal as taught by Geng in view of Wood in further view of Link and incorporate the low power for transmitting response messages as taught by Weeber in order to avoid any interference (Weeber: paragraph [0063]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the notice of reference cited (PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANESH K BARUA whose telephone number is (571)270-1017. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Sat: 11-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Payne can be reached on 5712723024. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PRANESH K BARUA/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights